I have mixed emotions about the shooting of Charles Kirk. I know I am not alone. I misread a Guardian Opinion piece which stated, inter alia:
The shocking killing of the co-founder of Turning Point USA Charlie Kirk, a hugely influential activist who rallied young people to Donald Trump’s cause and far-right ideology more broadly, has been widely and rightly condemned across the political spectrum. Leading Democrats and progressive activists made clear that such violence must not be tolerated.
I initially understood the phrase “widely and rightly condemned” to be a comment referring to Mr Kirk’s political views, rather than his killing. I thought that was a rather harsh but brave comment coming from the Guardian in the circumstances, until I re-read the paragraph for clarification, which of course was referring to the act of violence.
I later read another article on SUBSTACK by Ricky Hale of Council Estate Media which began:
When I heard that Charlie Kirk had been shot, my first feeling was sadness, and then as people reminded me of the terrible things he had said and done, I did not know what to feel. I had a mixture of emotions, I guess, same as I did when those billionaires took a submarine ride and we all laughed, but I still felt bad for them.
Here is the thing: you're not supposed to acknowledge the inner-conflict. You're supposed to mourn a dead father and say nice things about him, otherwise you're a terrible person. Also, you're supposed to not give a fuck about his passing, otherwise you're mourning a fascist. However you react, you will make someone mad.
The thing is, it's okay to feel sad that Charlie Kirk is dead, even though he was a terrible person, and it's okay to joke about him being dead, even though he was a family man. It's okay to feel mixed emotions because we're humans and so much about us is contradictory.
While I feel a tinge of sadness that a fellow human being has lost his life in such awful circumstances, this does not mean I will be shedding tears for him. Charlie Kirk does not deserve my tears. If you did not know much about him, the internet has been quick to remind us how horrendous his views were.
First of all, Kirk saw empathy as a weakness and joked about the attack on Paul Pelosi. He frequently denied there was starvation in Gaza and excused Israel's genocidal practices. He was a forced birther who said he would make his ten-year-old daughter carry a baby to term if she were raped. He was a horrendous racist who argued that black women were too stupid to be taken seriously. He called George Floyd a "scumbag" and said black people were better off in slavery. At one event, he kept referring to an Asian woman as "chink". He blamed transgender people for gun violence and called for the stoning of gay people. I could go on and on, but needless to say, Kirk was a person who stoked division and incited violence.
I confess Mr Hale’s point of view expresses more of what I feel about the incident. It is indeed very difficult for me not have mixed feelings about the death of a man like Charlie Kirk whose views and influence I abhor. I am clearly not alone. I have frequently written about opposing points of view. It is important to be aware of other’s views and coming to grips with trying to understand them, however appalling they may seem. For those on the left of the political spectrum, it is necessary to make a distinction between genuine conservative political views and racist bigotry. Indeed, not all socialists are immune from being racist, homophobic or anti-transgender. Political views, philosophies and personal emotions are often not rational. To paraphrase Richard Rorty when referring to Martin Heidegger, author of Being and Time, ‘there are many great books written by very bad men, Heidegger is just a supreme example’.
Personal contemplation as to why we exist, or how we came to be, does not necessarily improve the way people interact with each other, particularly when what we come to believe as fact is false or delusional. Much depends on what and how we are taught, or what and how we learn. Again, there is a distinction between teaching and learning.
So, like Ricky Hale, I cannot shed a tear for ‘influencer’ Charlie Kirk, however I can shed a tear for the American citizens who have to live with the continuing and growing hostility that will be engendered by this particular act of violence. They are also having to deal with a President who will try to make capital out of the situation for his own personal benefit, and use it to deflect from his own personal responsibility for promoting and creating the climate of violence and division that exists in today’s United States of America, which has led to the killing of Charlie Kirk.
An excellent piece Ed
ReplyDeleteThank you
ReplyDelete